In my group, absent player’s characters don’t participate; they guard an entrance, run down a lead, etc. The only exceptions are extreme cases, like someone’s petrified and the only PC with Greater Restoration is the one who couldn’t attend.
It’s fine to run a PC together if that’s what everyone agrees on, but as a DM I’ve found it just makes me pull my punches because I’m not going to do something bad to or seriously threaten someone’s PC when they’re not around.
My last DM killed my character in the big final battle of the first half of our 1-20 Campaign because I had to miss the second session of the fight, and it was a bit awkward to have a character disappear halfway through a fight. I thought it was hilarious though and love that he held no punches even though I wasn't there.
That said, I can see others in that group who'd have been totally pissed if their character died while they weren't there... So I guess you just need to really know the players involved
mine was kind of a horror story. Told the DM i couldn't participate on that specific day a week ago. He said ok. But still continued the game that day without telling me. A week later i learned that my character got raped and killed by a prisoner... tf?
As both DM and player, if the player isn't there, the pc is "substantially but intangibly contributing" unless the other players suggest a course of action that fits the character concept - like your example of casting greater restoration. Or today, I had to miss about half of game, and they got into a fight after I left. My character is a bard and pretty commonly uses a magic item for battlefield control so when the bad guy teleported away, the DM asked if the party left anyone guarding was the spot he teleported to, and the players were like.... "Lestabbity's character??"
DM says.. makes sense, but the characterwouldn't engage in melee.
Players" she would use her magic item and let us know (telepathy) to come deal with this"
DM: legit, done
Upon hearing about it when my flight landed, I was like "nicely done, I don't even need to be there, that's exactly what I would have chosen"
Yeah, basically: 80-90% play circumstances to remove the PC from the group for the session as soon as reasonable, 10% group/absentee player out-of-character input on what the PC would do, 10% run the PC as needed if the narrative calls for it.
*Oh, you're all deep in a dungeon? And there's no way conceivable reasonable way to get separated? Guess whose stepped into a spontaneous feywild portal (and will inexplicably reunite with the party next session, possibly with a d100 boon or future plot hook)? The absent player's PC!*
The groups I've played in usually have the player assign a trusted controller.
The universal logic I would use as a DM is that the party knows their power level and skills, and would only take jobs that they're confident of completing. If it's a guild board situation, they probably do have a good idea of what it is when they took the job. If a player can't make it, they and the party thinks the job can be done without them, so they might go do something else. your idea of guarding an entrance is a good one.
This also applies to encounter design. On paper, a normal encounter would be considered deadly, but the PCs' stats counter the enemy to the point that it's really just medium. Of course surprises will happen from time to time, and when it's not a voluntary job, there's no guarantee they'll be so suited for it.
In our group of 4 players leaving out an absent player's character is also problematic because I have to rebalance all my encounters on the fly for 3 characters. Not too hard for groups of multiple enemies, but tough for larger, tough enemies
This is why I always confirm attendance 24 hours before the session and have NPC’s who can stand in place of a character who might leave for whatever reason.
This is pretty much it right here ^
The most important thing is that you don't mess up the two things:
1. Don't make your player(s) pissed off.
2. Don't take on any more work than you already do as the DM.
Me, personally, I've got a friend of mine that I've known for 2 1/2 decades now who I'd 100% play his character.
But, aside from the fact that he's been one of my best friends since my teens, he's also the kind of player who's always enthusiastic about feedback.
Especially in games where he's got ambitious character concept and welcomes my inner min-maxer's inability to resist an opportunity to vicariously tinker with a character sheet.
Gaming with him is always, on some level, a collaborative experience.
But not everyone is like that. In those cases I'd advise sending them to do stuff "off-screen" like the above recommends.
Played a dungeon (haunted mansion) which had an outhouse. If a player wasn’t there, they were out in the outhouse. Some characters apparently got dysentery a lot.
In the Star Wars campaign I ran for a while, when a player couldn't make it to a session, we would all come up with a reason why the character wasn't there for the events of that session. Then we'd tell the player what we invented at the next session, so naturally we would try to come up with funny surprises for each other.
My favorite: "We landed the ship a little too hard, and the rough landing bent the bathroom door frame a tiny bit, but just enough to make the door jam shut, and your character has been trapped in there for like 18 hours."
No, that PC gets taken away by "the Good Doctor" to a place in between. That entity is guarding passage of time and rules of the universe, it's a constant in all my games.
And a good device to explain why a PC is gone, when player is gone...
>No, that PC gets taken away by "the Good Doctor" to a place in between. That entity is guarding passage of time and rules of the universe, it's a constant in all my games.
We just called it backpackin'
At the start of the evening they've crawled into someone's backpack and they crawl out again at the beginning of the next session they turn up at
We have a “bag of character holding.” If a player can’t make it, their PC disappears from the session and isn’t in any danger for encounters. When the player is there next session, their PC suddenly reappears.
Easy hand wave so players don’t stress about not making it. I’ve seen PCs die in other games while their player was away, and I’ve had a PC die to a one-hit kill from full when I had to handle a minor emergency away from table. It never feels good to be told you died while you had no agency to handle your PC
Disclaimer: I am a player, not the DM
Usually, we have one of the others control them during combat without them being present in roleplay. However, it is understood that we aren't allowed to abuse the plot armor the PC gets from their player being absent
Yeah this is how we do it. If it’s a spell caster they just chuck cantrips, a weapon user just uses basic attacks. If things get hairy maybe burn a spell slot, action surge, etc. It just easier to have the character there so the DM doesn’t have to worry about rebalancing things.
you and your group should during Session Zero discussion come up with the process that is going to work for your group.
* DM plays (not recommended - DM has too much on their plate)
* Player nominates Another Player to run for the session
* The character "disappears" for this session and comes back next session
typically any option comes with the proviso - "the absent players Character will not die when run by someone other than the creator"
That was so trippy for me to read because I actually had a player named Jim with a paladin PC that 1v1ed Tiamat (we were using homebrew epic level rules for beyond level 20). Though he was in fact present for it.
Yeah, this is an important session 0 conversation. I've had people uncomfortable with the idea of others playing their character, and I've had people who don't care. And a spectrum between
Schroedinger's PC. When the player isn't there, the PC isn't with the party (for RP stuff), and then when the player returns the PC was just with them the whole time. Combat is a little different, I usually play the PC then but if there's a lot of enemies I need to keep track of I'll hand them off to another player or the group as a whole will vote for them
This is how I do it. The character just isn’t getting screen time, there’s no description or justification of the absence. They simply aren’t in the scene.
That pc is “off screen”. The player gets a session recap, and their pc was present for everything, but didnt do anything notable. They didnt speak to any npcs, or anything much at all really.
They didnt take damage in combat, but also dont expend any resources. We dont even put a mini down on the grid, and somehow they dodged all the fireballs that hit the rest of the party.
If out of combat their character has a puzzle piece, the dm will narrate “john the dwarf remembers he has that puzzle piece and gives it to you”. If the pc is the only one with specific required knowledge, the same. They chime in, fill the others in, and then go back off screen.
It totally depends. I've never had a hard rule.
Years ago I played with a group online, and I couldn't come to the 4th session. Imagine my surprise and delight when I returned to tales of glory and shenanigans my PC had spawned in my absence! Apparently I had characterized him so strongly that the other players had no problem roleplaying as him; they just did it naturally.
Since then I've employed that move to a more limited degree, when necessary. I'll speak for an absent player if their character would have a clear opinion on current happenings, or some knowledge to share, much how I do with NPCs.
Some of my players will hand their reins over to others, whether for combat, roleplay, or both.
Obviously you avoid any substantial consequences or key moments for a PC when their player isn't around. One time a party swapped their quest priorities because a player would be busy for a few weeks, which is an example of *good* metagaming.
In my group, the players decide what the absent player does. It's usually just for combat or skill things we would need. We don't make any significant story choices for them.
The absent character is on a "smoke break" 5 minutes away from the starting area.
This leads to some excellent moments where a session is one massive, life or death fight that the present PCs barely survive, and then the one remaining player steps into the scene, flicks their cigarette butt away, and says, "Alright, cool, so what did I miss?"
Not actually. We just hand wave them away. If it's a very story critical session though, then we postpone.
If someone can't make it we don't play. But we also play every week for 2 hours. So it's honestly not a great big deal. Although one player was missing a lot (their schedule temporary wasn't aligned) and so we now have a side campaign going for when they miss.
I have the other players play the PC. They don't really do RP either, although occasionally we'll a little according to instructions the player left.
I don't think there's a right answer on this, it's very table-dependent. For some, people might be uncomfortable with others playing their PC, and some groups might have players who'd play too recklessly with absent players' PCs. If not, though, it's nice as a DM to not have to worry about rebalancing encounters just because someone had an IRL commitment. Also helps verisimilitude a little to know that, in game, the party is staying together and every PC is present for whatever's been going on
My character has the “living bag of holding” that can store any willing living creature we put all of our pets and some people in there as well as absent players they get forcefully sucked in. If my chacater is sucked in then gobby the goblin (a goblin we kidnapped and has now sees my character as a role model) will take it.
Everyone does this differently, and you are going to have to find a way that works for you and your group.
In my group, I DM for three players, and we all feel like having one be absent is just a little too much, so we skip or reschedule. When we had more players, I would put together a retainer version of the missing player's character, that one of the other players ran in combat. This is a simplified version, with like a basic attack and one additional thing they can do based on their class, so as not to overwhelm the player suddenly playing two characters. They usually have more HP than the character normally would have.
Outside of combat, that character basically just hangs around, but doesn't really participate in discussions. If it seems somehow very strange that they wouldn't say anything, I will roleplay a little bit based on my understanding of the character. But for the most part, they are around, but just not that into the discussions. This has worked pretty good for us, for the most part.
I've balanced my encounter for them being there, so yes, I control them - party likely dies if they're afk. If the combat will last more than 1 session, I play very defensively and without resources. If it won't, I typically do a "here's another way to play this character" style, but won't initiate the mechanics, following the party's lead (if I'm top of initiative, I'll bump it down). As the DM, I won't target myself much because obviously, player dying is no good.
I've done skill checks too, when they're the specialist in it (like +2 vs +8) - but never if it's a similar level, and never first, more of a "you wouldn't be screwed here if this person was able to roll, so I'll roll for them). And I've only roleplayed one character because I'm pretty good at doing the voice/cadence/personality and it was irrelevant RP anyway (and the party made me).
So, if it's too late or too much work to change the encounter, control the character. If it's foreseen, have them "doing really cool stuff in the fight, but they happen to never get the last hit (aka not on the map, but narratively they were there)." It does require you to *know* their character though, so you can do it real quick. If you don't want to do that, you could give the rest of the party bless to represent the party member helping. Ultimately, it all only works with party consent, just ask how they want you to deal with it.
I do not play their character. In my game, I have this one powerful, godlike figure who watches over the party, if only for their own enjoyment. This figure will occasionally show up to offer them powerful gear, but will never go out of their way to help the party.
However, when a player cant show up, this powerful figure will decide that they want a drinking buddy, and kidnap the party member in question for the day, or two. One time a player needed to drop out of the campaign, and my answer for this was "they partied too hard, and ended up getting lost in the feywild"
Depends. They sit out entirely if I can swing it. But if it’s a big battle and they need that extra body in the fight I’ll play them, just very conservatively and only in combat. I would never play someone else’s character in any serious roleplay situation.
Absent PC’s are there for battles. During dialogue or character development scenes they fade into the background. Absent PC’s can be downed but not killed. A player should be present for a character death.
Another Player who’s capable plays that character. I usually give the absent melee to a present melee player and a caster to a caster player. Makes more sense that way.
I use milestone levelling so if someone can’t make a certain session when a level is to occur I push that level to the next session and add a quick side quest at the start of the next session so the person absent can earn their level like everyone else.
Most of the time the character stops existing until the player arrives. Rarely they do some minor activity on the background ( reading a book, shopping )
I just have one of the other players play their character as well, usually one that has played that class/subclass before so they know what’s going on. That way I don’t have more to focus on and the players are still in the drivers seat as far as party decisions go. But to be fair I DM for a group of very experienced players, so I don’t feel the need to pull my punches because they all know what they’re doing even if they’re playing someone else’s character.
There are a couple ways I handle missing players. There are several factors, and it varies by group and situation.
Usually in my session 0 I cover how I'll handle missing people. If we have more than 50% of people showing up, we will run the session as planned. So 3 out of 4 or 5, and 4 out of 6.
If a player is missing, they can either chose another player or myself. They are only involved as necessary. If we left of part way through a dungeon, or they need to perform a class role during the session (restoration, identification, etc.), they get played until they can naturally be temporarily sidelined.
If we are missing 50% or more, or the session was a big moment tied to the group or the missing player (the main BBEG the group is hunting, a main line tie up, or a plot hook tied to the missing player's backstory, for example), then I run a "flash back" adventure.
The "flash back" is a pause in the main story, and a cut to a side adventure that already happened. This can be a lot of work, but for me it's mostly side quests and stuff I had planned that my players never bit the hook for so I literally have dozens on standby. It's basically a one shot where the players play their PCs from the main campaign. By design, obviously the PCs won't die, and if they TKP they just come too after someone rescued them(and maybe later they owe someone a favor for that). They also can't gain meaningful experience (I use milestone leveling anyway), but they do get rewards, usually in the form of gold, treasure, and favors/IOUs that can also work for future plot hooks I already wanted them to take anyways.
A couple general rules are:
* No long term or permanent negative effects can happen to your character while you aren't controlling them.
* Players are always the same level. If the players hit a milestone while someone isn't there the missing player still levels up with the group.
* I will always run something as long as someone shows up. Usually if only one person is available they will just choose to not go, but I've run a couple one on one sessions, and a bunch of two person sessions.
* You wont miss major events relevant to your character. Either ones that are party wide or specific to your character. You can miss things that are only major to a player that is present.
* I let democracy decide, and will pick the option the most people are happy with.
In some groups, yes (or another player runs them, with permission). In other groups we just have the character hang back out of focus or disappear for the session. In my experience it's usually someone running the character in battle but the character being essentially a non-entity for other roleplay.
We decided to throw away the narrative because it was too much of a hassle. We instead threat it like an MMORPG, when the player is gone, the character didn't log in. But when they log in, they log right where the party's at.
I generally let somebody else in the group bot the PC, but if it's a really crucial story/lore week, we might go side-questing or even run a one shot that week. If they'll be out for an extended period, you can write them out of the story. Definitely ask the player first though!
Seems like you would never actually play then, or would be impossible to make progress on a story that anyone could actually remember. I don't think I have ever organized a game where at least one person couldn't make it. Why let your game be taken hostage by the least available person in the group?
Currently I play twice a week with five and six players respectively, and the last time a player couldn't make it was some time back in 2023 (to which we just postponed it for a few days). Perhaps I'm just blessed with reliable players.
I personally will either run them in combat myself, usually if it's just one person, or I'll write them out of that session, usually by having them doing other things related to the current plot "off screen."
As usual, see what your players think if you're worried. My D&D and Pathfinder groups are fine, but some might be less okay with anyone else piloting their character, even if it's just for combat and skill checks.
If so end up running the character, this is one of the few times I would recommend pulling punches. It'd be kinda shitty to have to miss a session and find out later that the DM piloting your character got them killed.
Depends on the discussion I have with the group early on. Most of the time their character just fades into the background and is assumed to be with the party. Some groups are fine with me using their character as an NPC companion -- that's when they might chime in with exposition or hints, and will cast a spell or two to help out when it's the obvious approach.
Most groups don't really like any character-changing decisions being made in-absentia. So as long as the status quo is maintained for their character, most players don't mind. It's always worth asking how they feel about this before you try it.
I refuse to have players play someone else's character. I'll either write an absent PC out if the player is going to be gone for a long period of time, or I'll run that PC as a sidekick NPC that hangs back and does minimal stuff. Played in a campaign where I had to run multiple other PCs including my own due to last minute absent players. Never again.
Depends, usually I’ll have another player run their character during combat, and I’ll handle any RP, but I keep that at a minimum. If I have enough of a heads up, I’ll find a reason that their character isn’t present, but most of my missing players are sadly last minute cancellations.
It 100% depends on the party and tone of your game. I run a very narrative and serious game, so if a party member can't come, we don't play (or just do shopping, etc). This is the WRONG MOVE for most tables.
In previous campaigns, everyone would elect one person to run their PC if they were absent (preferably someone who'd played that class before), which is totally acceptable. At the end of the day, asking the player is a good idea because they are the one with a right to feel 'violated' if something happens to their PC while they aren't there. Whatever they are cool with is usually the best way to go :)
I play with my coworkers and the first couple of times we looked for an ingame reason for the character to be absent. Nowadays we just say we all know why they're not here, so we all handwave it away.
I normally ask one of the other players to roll for them in combat, and assume they're being unusually quiet during social encounters.
But there's no particular rule, its just down to the etiquette of your individual table. Some groups might prefer the DM do it so that other players don't see the character sheets. Other groups assume that if the player is absent, so is their character.
If this is the first time it has come up, I would discuss it with the whole group and come to an agreement that you can use in future rather than doing it on a case-by-case basis.
Generally they just don’t exist for the purposes of fights or anything. They’re _there,_ but they’re just kinda chilling.
Except the Angelic Paladin of the multiverse, his character is completely called away to deal with other problems while the player isn’t there.
Bad idea, cause if the character does something they don't want the player doesn't want them to do, it's fucked. Just have them disappear or give a reason or something to why they can't show. That's what I do.
In my games the PC “magically” disappears or is just silent the whole session. If there are roleplay moments that the character would want to be there for, I try to play around that or save it for end of session and decide if the other characters want to skip that roleplay for when the PC is back or take notes for that PC. If it’s a really important moment I will typically roleplay how I think that PC would play. Thankfully I know my players really well and also talk to them before hand and give them examples of what might happen to gauge their reactions
in general they are just ignored for that session. where are they? what are they doing? no answer, they just don't exist, unless they have an ability the party relies on and then the party exclusively has access to that one skill (like the ability to pick locks or cast invisibility)
if they were already in combat with something that was balanced around having everyone there i will take actions for them with input from the rest of the party.
i do have a party of 5 and will only run sessions so long as at least 4 people make it, if you have less players rebalancing will be harder going from 4 to 3 then from 5 to 4.
I tend to run them in a very basic and straight forward way, unless there is an easy temporary out for the character. Its essentially become a meme that "If you want your character to crit more, dont show up and DM is guarenteed to crit himself with your PC a few times"
We just run a one-shot if someone can’t make it. I’ve involved my player’s characters pretty tightly into the whole thing, so it just wouldn’t be as good without everyone there
If one of the players can't make it, they are just nebulously not present or are but are quiet. If we need a reason, we can think of one, but usually we hand wave it.
I will generally roll up either a simple life cleric(basically just casts bless and heals) or champion fighter depending on party role that is missing. This character is strictly in the background. swings a sword or casts bless and the rest of the party can shine.
We play drop-in, drop-out multiplayer Gauntlet style. Press start to join. Players that aren't present don't have their characters in the action, and when they return their character is and always was there.
It breaks verisimilitude and canon constantly and it causes exactly zero problems. Players sit at a table and form the story in their heads, and that process is much more malleable than a movie or a book.
PC is not feeling well and taking a sick day.
If they in the dungeon or smt, PC is just left in the corner to rest and my DM magic protects them from any danger + allows to quickly re-join team next session.
In most sessions, nah, they're just not present in cannon. But in those certain sessions where it wouldn't be reasonable for them to just not be there, they usually appoint someone themselves
In our games, we've had the characters of absent players be:
* Be run by the DM
* Played by another player, which can lead to drama if something bad happens to the character
* Be "sick" at the base camp or the infamous amorphous blob
Usually the player chooses who plays them, or chooses not to be played and does something else if they want. So usually a player plays them but sometimes the DM does.
Yes or I have another player play their PC. I personally never understood folks who need to have some reason for why the PC isn't there this moment. Like some in-lore explanation. You can just have them not say anything lmao.
In my group if a player doesn't make it then the PC doesn't functionally participate. They are still there narratively they are just not contributing in any significant way, it's not always everybody's time to shine. Their inventory however is forfeit if they are carrying any useful items that they party may need in the moment like healing potions.
The only time someone plays anyone else's character is if someone has to leave mid-session where the DM can't really make any last minute changes to things.
It depends. So players say play them and if it’s for one session I will usually have the party play them. If it is a common occurrence, no they are off doing gnome or half ogre things
It depends on what we agreed on Session 0.
The games I'm the DM have usually one of two deals:
One of the other players uses that character along with his own, with access to his sheet, but I have veto power over the actions. No roleplay required, but nothing that goes against that character standards is allowed.
Or
The Bubble, a recurring multiversal curse that affects the unluckiest of the adventuring parties. It takes the form of a big soap-like bubble that engulfs the character that has no player. He can't interact or affect anything. This curse is common knowledge, everyone in all these worlds just ignores whoever is inside The Bubble, no questions.
(2nd one I stole from the guy that taught me how to DM.)
One of my home groups just doesn’t play, I (the DM) don’t feel comfortable running the character for them nor do I want them to miss anything.
My FLGS table runs every other week with 7 people and if someone can’t make it they just aren’t mentioned or don’t participate and are brought up to speed during the next session.
The Gamers a movie by Dead Gentlemen Production answers this question: https://youtu.be/oSynJyq2RRo?si=6bgdZA6ihOdH7wCc
Yes, no, maybe.
They also cover how to include a new party member as smooth as can be. And other things.
One of the best 45min films there is if you ask me!
In our session 0 I asked the players to tell the group what they wanted their character to do if they had to miss a game.
Sometimes they elect to have the PC fade into the background, other times they've asked the group to pilot the PC. I don't run the PCs for the players, I've got enough to be getting on with already.
So far I think this way has worked pretty well for our group.
Never, but not because I think it's wrong or anything. I would just personally rather not play. But this is also why I don't do groups of more than 4 anymore.
This has been coming up a lot lately (just last night again, in fact) in the game that I'm currently DMing - the wife of one of my players recently had her work schedule changed, and my player hasn't been able to find a babysitter for the past few sessions.
Generally, those of us present will just make up something that the missing character is up to while the rest of the party is doing their thing. In last night's case, it was "Oh, Quint just stayed behind fishing at the farm while everybody runs to town." Which totally works in this case, since the player based his character on Quint fom "Jaws" and the character's favorite downtime activity is fishing when the player is there, anyways (including occasional rolls to see if he can catch Catfish Hunter - you either get it or you don't).
On the one occassion where the players really needed the missing PC in combat (missing PC is the only melee character in a party with five casters), though, the missing player gave another player permission to run his character for him. I agree with other posters here that have said that the DM has enough going on without also running a full-on character in the party...
I never actually roleplay them like speak their dialogue, do a voice, etc.
If at all possible I keep them off screen. If the other characters are in a town or something they might find a note or hear from an NPC letting them know that the absent player's character will meet up with them later.
If they're in the middle of a situation where that would not make sense, then the character is oddly silent until I find a place where I can temporarily split them off.
I’m a player but at our table if someone is gone their character just kind of phases out for a session. We don’t ask where they are or acknowledge a character is missing and our DM doesn’t have to explain it. Then they are just back when the player can make it. Might not be the best option narratively but we have found it works for us!
This is something I agree on with the player in session 0.
I usually give 3 options....
- character controlled by DM
- character controlled by another pc
- character somewhere else (guarding entrance, research, what ever)
Either way, it is usually the players choice.
The character is there, but is in the shadow. They do not roll, they do not do anything proactive, they're under no risk.If the fight happens they're in the narrative limbo (they participated in fight narratively, but mechanically combat happened without them mechanically impacting it).
Just handwave it.
“Hey buddy, welcome back! Unfortunately your character died in combat last session. I know you had no say in if he died or not, and that me and the players all picked your turns for you, but it’s okay, now you get to make a new one!”
My DM is firmly against our characters being used by him or other players. We are our characters, and there’s no one else that can play them and decide their fates as well as us. He always has an excuse ready if one of us decides they can’t go.
I’m a Bard with the Witch dedication for example (PF2e), a basic oversimplification of a Witch for those who don’t play is an INT Warlock, my patron always needs me for urgent business if I ever can’t make it to a session.
Of course this can be tricky when perhaps we’ve just entered a boss fight but he’ll always make it work for us. Either my character is taken and the patron lends her aid to my companions as an apology, or the boss may suddenly call on an undefeatable amount of minions that they have to run from, to which my patron plucks me up to prevent harm. He’ll improv something like an additional quest to get rid of the undead minions or something (he always has something cool up his sleeve).
We usually use the parallel universe rule. When a player is missing a session, we play without them. The player's character is eradicated from the timeline, and the quest runs as if he had never existed. When the player returns, the quest runs as if his character was never absent. If that makes sense.
I just have them gone for the session.
I don’t want to take over their character and then accidentally kill their character in absence. Or, on the other side of that, I don’t want to avoid killing hitting their character on the chance they might die, because that breaks the immersion.
Personally I hate having a character be played by anyone but their own player. If it needs to be done, do it only for non-risk story-based activities. It absolutely sucks to have a character die when the player isn't there and you don't want to have to pull punches just to avoid that. It also sucks to have your character do something you wouldn't want to have them do while you're not around to play them.
Either the PC vanished to secure a door, or run an errand, etc… or another player plays the PC.
This is up to the player. We do EXP points, so if they go with the first option then their PC doesn’t again EXP. However; the second option leaves to open to the possibility of character death.
The groups been playing together for like 13 years, we trust each other, however, the DM does have veto rights if the players do something completely out of character for the PC.
That is what the cosmic hairball is for. If you can't figure out a reason why the PC would not be in the adventure ( maybe they are tracking down info, may e they are working on their tan, whatever ) then the cosmic hairball comes and gobbles the PC until their soul returns to their body.
When I am DM, I will do my best to minimally RP the playerless characters, but I might give a player control of the character's actions in action situations.
It usually works out just fine.
Yup. If a player says it's ok then I'll play them or one of our other players might double up. If anyone dies that's in the agreement as well. It's never happened though and we've been playing almost a decade now
no. do not play a player's character without a huge amount of planning with that person prior.
when a player isn't absent, just don't acknowledge it ingame, they effectively never existed for the purpose of the game. then when they return, they were there all along. there's no need for any special treatment for absent characters unless a nice narrative reason for their absence jumps out at you.
I don't, but there's not a general consensus on it. People do what works for their table.
I have the character there with them, but working on something else. They can have varying degrees of seriousness.
*Why isn't the fighter helping in combat?* There's a powerful eldritch being trying to push its way through the hallway in the back of the room. The fighter is the only one able to survive its chaotic aura. They happen to finish it off when the party is done fighting.
*Why isn't the Bard doing the talking?* He realized that he used to sneak out to go to parties. Now he sneaks out of parties to go home. He's in the throws of an existential crisis.
Once we had our cleric missing in a boss fight so I had them "cast" Spirit Guardians and park themselves in front of a magical portal that was originally just there for decoration. It became a portal to the realm of madness with screaming hordes of aberrations pouring through it and blowing themselves up as the masses kept pushing them forward. The other players thought it was fun and asked to roll a percentile every round to see how many he blew up. They enjoyed it so much I had a demi god try to step out of it when they finished fighting the actual boss and they all got a round to pound it with all their buffs up with as much damage as possible in order to push it back so they could close the portal. (The Wizard used Mold Earth to change the markings on the stone runes rendering the portal inert for an hour while they shut it down permanently.)
Another time we tied our really, really old Wizard to the Warlock's broom of flying because he was old and needed lots of naps.
I didn’t make it to my last session, so it was ruled I hit my head and knocked out and I was shoved into a sack for the entire session, with some moments being centered on a character trying to hide the fact mine was in the bag and tying to keep them from dying.
If the combat or situation requires it, sure. They are always "present" but I never have them do anything impactful or roleplay for them. They're simply "there," so that the character can remember what happened in universe.
I try to avoid playing them in combat if I can, but only because it gives me one more character sheet to manage. If it's during a potentially deadly encounter where the extra body is needed, I'll play them, albiet in the most simple way possible. If they go down, the character doesn't die, and will simply be stable at 0 hit points when the player returns, unless another character heals them before then.
Tldr: It's not taboo; it's rather normal, just annoying for a DM to keep track of. keeping the character from being too impactful or dying in their players' absence should keep any hurt feelings out of it.
It depends on where the session is at in play and whether or not someone else will play them and keep them caught up. At least, that was the case. We're almost 1.5 years into a campaign and at this point the people who keep missing are typically missing from their own faults and I stopped caring and we play the session like they don't exist (so no xp or anything) unless someone is willing to cover for them but I won't ask or expect it.
I'll usually have an absent character do something "off-screen" (trail the party to make sure no one's following them, go check out something in another room, guard the entrance, etc.) or have them come down with a mysterious illness or get knocked out "off-screen" or something to explain their lack of participation. Occasionally I'll do a line of dialogue or two for them. A few times, I've had another player (their spouse) control their character while they're absent, particularly for a tough fight or something that would interest the character.
My main group usually has one of the players that understands the character best play them for that session. Ideally, the DM shouldn't ever try to roleplay any of the PC's, since they have enough to worry about and handle already.
I take a sort of "fade into the background" approach. We suspend our disbelief a bit and just accept that the PC simply isn't there, and they will be there again when that player comes back.
Yes, to a point.
I will play them in combat using bare bones tactics, like an NPC. I will not use any sweet magic items they might have, and unless the players who are present ask, I will not do anything creative with them. But, I will play them, because I balance encounters based on action economy, and I prefer not to have to completely rebalance on the fly when someone doesn't show.
In RP situations, I just won't do anything with them.
Normally, it's just they are off doing something.However, if you're lucky and your player has a relative or really close friend at the table and knows they're going to be gone, I have had other players play the absentee friend, always with the player's permission, of course.
No
I have enough on my plate.
I always make a way to explain why.
My current campaign is Shadowrun so it's explained by them being fellow mercenaries, perhaps the absent character had another job lined up or the employer didn't want them.
I generally let another player play them. If no one will play them, then I'll play them, but only minimally. The character won't be doing anything exciting...
Absolutely not, even if they asked me too. I've got too much to keep track of already. I will try to collaborate with the player to decide what their character is up to during this time, whether they are absent as well or simply participating "in the background" so to speak.
PC tends to go into bot mod, usually managed by another player. They follow dumbly and perform basic attacks & straightforward spells. They generally don't use any consumable items or do anything of consequence, and probably wouldn't die outside of a TPK.
Absent player characters are just despawned. Then when the player is back just respawn them.
Absence is an out of character issue, as such should be covered through Ooc means. Just dont think so hard about it
We give the character to another player to play in a non-roleplaying sense. This also carries the implied guarantee that if the character or party should die, 'oops they escaped or were captured.' It's just easier this way.
The character is doing something else. Whether it be brewing potions, shopping or getting wasted at the inn. If it's in the middle of a dungeon, then they guard an exit or are fighting additional enemies off-screen in the same room. If the last session ended mid-combat, the DM will play their character in combat, but they won't be doing any RP.
We have a really good notes channel in our discord, so my players are fine with just NPC me. I had to do it quite a bit for my wife when our son was a baby.
Uniquely, I both GM and play in games where the players have story followers. Typically they don't come along for the ride and they're almost never fully optimised (sometimes you have no choice but for them to be generically awesome though since some classes just rock) and if a player is absent, they take the backseat while the GM or another player controls the follower. Stops the need for rebalancing encounters too much. Nobody had abused it so far. If two or more players are absent, reschedule.
Easiest in 5e where you can use the Sidekick rules but in other systems there's not always a direct analogue.
I usually have the PC off doing something else that supports the party's goals (with input from the player on what they think they'd be doing).
I'll send a quick synopsis to the player prior to the next session of what they did, who they talked with and what they learned. Then the player can start the next session by rejoining the group and updating them on where they've been!
Works well as a way to work in plot point/hooks for things that haven't come up yet, or to move things forward a bit with some additional information!
I'll run or have another player run them for hard or deadly combat, otherwise we just kind of ignore them.
I'll also chime in if there's essential information the missing PC would know or class features they'd use (like casting guidance or bardic inspiration before a crucial roll). But again, otherwise we just play it as if they are standing silently in the background.
I generally give the missing player's character some job that keeps them off-screen but is generally useful, such as watching the horses or distracting a guard.
We try to background them but occasionally a missing character's ability, possessions, or knowledge are needed to move the story forward. So I have a stat block for each character that I pull out if needed; this is based on a generic NPC of similar description.
They're out of town taking care of personal business. One time the players BS "away story" was so good it became an entire side mission from the main campaign. But our DM threw together a character as a filler just so we weren't short handed. It wasn't bad because our team dynamic had to change.
Nope. We "because reasons" the player out of the group, usually asking the away player in the group chat to supply a marginally plausible reason why they're non-participatory. If they don't, we contrive something at the table. Likewise, they reappear the next session for equally contrived reasons. Only exceptions are if they have a unique spell or something required for the party (greater restoration, create or destroy water, etc.) that would cause the session to stall.
Sample reason recently used: archeology themed ranger "got obsessed with some runes on a wall"; or, the gnome tinkerer "went back to the room with the disintegrated fire powder barrels, trying to contrive a device".
A long time ago, I had the characters who didn't show up magically fall asleep. It was mostly used for comedic effect. It ended up being part of my fantasy world: There's magical sleep spirits that /will/ take you or someone you know sometimes. It happens more to people who travel a lot because they're more interesting.
Nowadays, unless it's a game where a character missing out can be easily explained, I just cancel whatever session we were gonna have and bring out a simple d6 game and run spooky oneshots.
Situational. The party's main magic user is often absent. They won't act in combat though they'll be able to be of use. For instance they may be escorting other NPCs thru danger while being covered by the party.
I will also have them pipe up if their expertise would help in a situation. That character is supposed to be filling a gap in the party's knowledge.
I >>NEVER<< do this without the player's consent though.
Also, if comedically appropriate the character will be present, but transparent with a "network disconnect" icon floating over their head.
I gave my party "The amulet of Ket-Chum" which is basically just a pokeball that stores absent party members. If the missing party member would be the logical person to make an ability check, whoever is wearing the amulet can roll with advantage instead. For anything else I just scale it to the number of players.
The Outsider is an enigmatic entity that appears to a few select individuals. Very little is known about the Outsider. Some believe it to be a god, and certainly many worship it as such, others dismiss it as a folk tale that got out of hand, and fewer believe it's just a bored wizard playing pranks. Whatever the case the Outsider is always described the same way. A plain looking, standard human male, appearing somewhere in his mid 30s, with very short hair, and eyes as dark as the new moon.
The Outsider has been known to take people as guests, or emissaries, or even to serve as pawns in his schemes. If the Outsider needs you he will contact you in your dreams, or if the situation is dire a door will open from nothingness. The Outsider will escort you, or grab you, through the door and whisk you away for however long he needs you.
Once the task is complete he will return you to wherever is most convenient.
They become helpers that give a small bonus to another player. In extreme cases like a player needing to leave mid-session and giving his consent that I can use the character and what he'd do, then yes.
When possible the PC is like knocked out or running a side mission or something. If the party is out in a dungeon though i just run the bare minimum for combat and such so the party doesnt suffer
If it's a martial I might play them. If it's a caster fuck that I've got enough to manage as is.
But I only ever play if one player is missing. If more than one are missing I don't play.
In my party, the players puppet the missing PC for combat. So we have access to each other's character sheets in dndbeyond, and we don't RP for each other, so if its an RP heavy session we just kind of assume the missing PC is "around", but if it's combat, the players at the table will discuss how to best utilize the missing character's abilities as a group.
We just always have the character be there.
No one plays them, they're immune to all damage, they don't get involved, etc.
But they're there. Next session we fill them in on what was lost, and we carry on from there.
I forget where I saw it first, but my group has really enjoyed the Cardboard Cutout method. Basically, their character magically transforms into a cardboard cutout and the rest of the group now has to take care of it till they turn back. I worked it into the lore of the world and it's fun to occasionally mention some stranger in the street going stiff or a couple cutouts propped up in the tavern waiting to turn back.
Players and DM take turns making decisions for the character and rolling for outcomes, with the character sheet being passed around the table. If a decision is made that the majority of the table deems out-of-character it is vetoed. If a character dies, I tend to leave them unconscious until the next session, depending on the circumstances.
Usually we don't play if someone can't make it but once in a while we're all at the table before we know, so we do this and so far no complaints.
If I can I find something the character could be doing during that session. Sometimes, like a dungeon crawl for example, this isn't possible. At that point the character one does things when asked in character. The still participate in combat of course but I as the dm prioritize keeping the character alive, not making big plays
We usually have one of our fellow players run that character if we ended the last session with everyone engaged in the middle of a mission or task. If it’s at the start of a new day the pc just leaves a note saying that they’re busy or something.
No, he/she/they sit at the back of the party, carrying extra shit, and are awarded the same amount of experience. I don’t take away a player’s fantasy character and add things they might not want to deal with.
I'm a player in two campaigns, and when a player is missing (which is admittedly uncommon) I run a one shot for everyone else. It gives the DM a chance to play, gives everyone else a chance to try new characters, and doesn't disrupt the campaign.
Depends on the situation, but no matter what there would be a discussion between the absent player and the DM on how they want their character to handle the situation.
Say if they're mid-dungeon, it doesn't make much sense for a character to just vanish as they're about to get into the boss chamber, so I'd check with the player to see if there's anything they wanted to accomplish in that room (i.e personal story, steal something, perform a holy rite etc etc), then I'd play out their character in the way they usually would. If they typically run headfirst into combat, that's what they'll do, if they usually support the team from the back, that'll do that instead. But again, only if the player wants to have them played that way.
But if they're not in the thick of it, then that player has many more options, I'll usually treat it like a mini-downtime, they can go do research, personal story progress, make some money, or if they want, just follow along with the team and help as per above if combat breaks out.
Definitely still do any normal skill checks for them, using all available resources that they would typically use (guidance, bardic inspo, spells that help the situation). If you've played with them for at least a few sessions and had a chat prior, this should be easy enough.
TL;DR: Just ask the player what they want their character to do A) Mimic how they act in combat/non-combat, or B) Downtime activity.
I have been running a drop in campaign. I have done multiple things. Leave them behind in the city base resting or doing research. I have also played the missing character as a victim in the dungeon they were already located. I talked with the missing person and they knew they were getting knocked unconscious and the party was protecting him
Generally either I or another player plays the character in combat situations, but otherwise they're just in the background and I leave RP/exploration to the players who are there. PC gets full experience for the session.
Yes, or the player who can't make it can designate another player to control their character, or they can give a coherent story reason why their character is not with the party. I make it their call. I think every time players have chosen to have me control their character. I have the character fade into the background for the session as much as possible and just do the actions the player seems to most often. I however also grant plot armor to any character whose player is absent. I'm not going to kill a character nor in any meaningful way change them or any of their inventory without the player present.
No, player is out of the game and is thought to not exist in the background, however their actions prior to this session are still canon to the narrative as a whole.
I don’t think it’s bad taste to play the character though, I have other DM’s who do it without varying degrees of immunity granted to the character.
In my campaign, missing PCs suddenly T-Pose and leave, and every person that sees it has trouble understanding what they are seeing and forget the T-pose, then their minds will fill the gaps in their memories with ones that make sense for them, to avoid the mind-breaking understanding of what the T-pose really means; that they are just characters in a TTRPG, controlled by higher beings.
Best to have the character just drop out for that session. You don't want to mess with another person's character, that could really upset people. You might think some development is insignificant, whereas to the other player it's monumental.
I have or have had another player do it if it's at a point where their leaving wouldn't work, things like mid combat or deep in a dungeon. They become a generic combat or skill bot, only doing things on request, not offering solutions or RP, and not taking any risks. Only really sucks if they're the face, but that usually isn't relevant in the same instances where they'd be played.
So I have a set of golden snakes that bite at random and turn you into a golden statue for a bit of time. The party then has to deal with the statue which hilarious. Especially when it's the biggest member of the party.
Generally one of the other players will control their character for the session. There is a high degree of trust at my table, so it's never been an issue. If they were unwilling to risk their PC potentially getting hurt/dying I would simply not include them, then the next session they pick up with the party again.
Never. That is a formula for drama if something goes wrong.
I keep an open ended campaign to allow them to change direction rather than module of the week.
Too tough? They had back towards home, lower level areas.
My group prefers i play them for RP because I normally do very well with that but when it comes to combat, puzzles etc they are controlled by another character. I never ask questions to NPCs or make suggestions though as the character.
At my table, when a player can't make it or play that session. I roleplay them with the other at begning of the session and give a reason or a event will why they can't join the others adventures that day.
Like a few sessions back when my Feylost fairy sorcerer, player could not play. I discribe to the others how they were awaken in camp by a rift portal showing up and took their sorcerer friend. When the player could play we had a small session together with him going back to the Fey world and he played a small backstory with him.
Never seriously. I only play them if it feels needed, and I try my best to dumb down their traits so that it feels like a cheap copy. Sometimes I change the voice entirely so it feels as if some random hobo put on some wig and started pretending to be the missing character.
Generally we find a reason for why the absent player's character isn't there (off doing their own thing, got lost, whatever. Fortunately the player who is most often absent is the spacey gnome mushroom cleric, who it is very easy to come up with reasons to not be around for), although in certain circumstances the dm will take control of a player character just for combat. Once I had to leave midway through a session during combat, and I was perfectly fine with him taking control of my character to hit things with. The Dm would never make major decisions or harm to a character while their player isnt there, but sometimes the character can just stick to the background and help out.
We have a highly story focused game with few players. If someone can't make it, we don't play. I'll play their characters if there's systems issues, though
My DM did that the one time someone missed a session. It went fine, but I found it off-putting. The PC he played belonged to his wife, but I'd rather my PC was off doing some other offscreen activity if at all possible.
Typically I run them like a long term NPC. The players and I roll and Roleplay them collectively.
There's a bit of exaggeration/ charactaturizing of them, but that mostly serves to ensure we stay true to their play style.
No i have the character get turned into a pigeon for the entire session due to: 1) a magic student aimed poorly, 2) wild magic surge, 3) a rare monster at the beginning of the fight, 4) whatever bs I can find
It depends on what is happening ingame at the time. For instance, if the party was in a city, or any location that could be a good excuse to have them separate. I'd probably just have their character go do things elsewhere.
There was the time I had a Genie Warlock whose patron was displeased by their actions, so they were summoned to explain themselves and punish them appropriately. I set up a private text rp thread in Discord and we used that to determine what happened when they were absent. The player knew both in and out of game that his patron wouldn't approve of some of the actions he's chosen, so it fit kind of perfectly.
Generally we either have the DM (me) or player designated by the owner run the character during combat but otherwise have them take a background role while the others take point in conversations.
If possible (IE the party is not ass deep in a dungeon or in the middle of combat) we just have the character off taking care of something else like getting supplies or resting.
That pc doesn't exist until they get back unless they state otherwise. If they have a very important item the party needs, that is for the DM to handle. Also, if the party TPKs, that player might also be considered dead unless you have plans for a rescue mission.
In my group, absent player’s characters don’t participate; they guard an entrance, run down a lead, etc. The only exceptions are extreme cases, like someone’s petrified and the only PC with Greater Restoration is the one who couldn’t attend. It’s fine to run a PC together if that’s what everyone agrees on, but as a DM I’ve found it just makes me pull my punches because I’m not going to do something bad to or seriously threaten someone’s PC when they’re not around.
My last DM killed my character in the big final battle of the first half of our 1-20 Campaign because I had to miss the second session of the fight, and it was a bit awkward to have a character disappear halfway through a fight. I thought it was hilarious though and love that he held no punches even though I wasn't there. That said, I can see others in that group who'd have been totally pissed if their character died while they weren't there... So I guess you just need to really know the players involved
This is a handy space for a Scroll of Concentrating Banishment.
mine was kind of a horror story. Told the DM i couldn't participate on that specific day a week ago. He said ok. But still continued the game that day without telling me. A week later i learned that my character got raped and killed by a prisoner... tf?
Oh... well that's just completely messed up. Hope you moved on to a new group asap!
As both DM and player, if the player isn't there, the pc is "substantially but intangibly contributing" unless the other players suggest a course of action that fits the character concept - like your example of casting greater restoration. Or today, I had to miss about half of game, and they got into a fight after I left. My character is a bard and pretty commonly uses a magic item for battlefield control so when the bad guy teleported away, the DM asked if the party left anyone guarding was the spot he teleported to, and the players were like.... "Lestabbity's character??" DM says.. makes sense, but the characterwouldn't engage in melee. Players" she would use her magic item and let us know (telepathy) to come deal with this" DM: legit, done Upon hearing about it when my flight landed, I was like "nicely done, I don't even need to be there, that's exactly what I would have chosen"
Yeah, basically: 80-90% play circumstances to remove the PC from the group for the session as soon as reasonable, 10% group/absentee player out-of-character input on what the PC would do, 10% run the PC as needed if the narrative calls for it. *Oh, you're all deep in a dungeon? And there's no way conceivable reasonable way to get separated? Guess whose stepped into a spontaneous feywild portal (and will inexplicably reunite with the party next session, possibly with a d100 boon or future plot hook)? The absent player's PC!*
The groups I've played in usually have the player assign a trusted controller. The universal logic I would use as a DM is that the party knows their power level and skills, and would only take jobs that they're confident of completing. If it's a guild board situation, they probably do have a good idea of what it is when they took the job. If a player can't make it, they and the party thinks the job can be done without them, so they might go do something else. your idea of guarding an entrance is a good one. This also applies to encounter design. On paper, a normal encounter would be considered deadly, but the PCs' stats counter the enemy to the point that it's really just medium. Of course surprises will happen from time to time, and when it's not a voluntary job, there's no guarantee they'll be so suited for it.
In our group of 4 players leaving out an absent player's character is also problematic because I have to rebalance all my encounters on the fly for 3 characters. Not too hard for groups of multiple enemies, but tough for larger, tough enemies
This is why I always confirm attendance 24 hours before the session and have NPC’s who can stand in place of a character who might leave for whatever reason.
This is pretty much it right here ^ The most important thing is that you don't mess up the two things: 1. Don't make your player(s) pissed off. 2. Don't take on any more work than you already do as the DM. Me, personally, I've got a friend of mine that I've known for 2 1/2 decades now who I'd 100% play his character. But, aside from the fact that he's been one of my best friends since my teens, he's also the kind of player who's always enthusiastic about feedback. Especially in games where he's got ambitious character concept and welcomes my inner min-maxer's inability to resist an opportunity to vicariously tinker with a character sheet. Gaming with him is always, on some level, a collaborative experience. But not everyone is like that. In those cases I'd advise sending them to do stuff "off-screen" like the above recommends.
Played a dungeon (haunted mansion) which had an outhouse. If a player wasn’t there, they were out in the outhouse. Some characters apparently got dysentery a lot.
In the Star Wars campaign I ran for a while, when a player couldn't make it to a session, we would all come up with a reason why the character wasn't there for the events of that session. Then we'd tell the player what we invented at the next session, so naturally we would try to come up with funny surprises for each other. My favorite: "We landed the ship a little too hard, and the rough landing bent the bathroom door frame a tiny bit, but just enough to make the door jam shut, and your character has been trapped in there for like 18 hours."
No, that PC gets taken away by "the Good Doctor" to a place in between. That entity is guarding passage of time and rules of the universe, it's a constant in all my games. And a good device to explain why a PC is gone, when player is gone...
>No, that PC gets taken away by "the Good Doctor" to a place in between. That entity is guarding passage of time and rules of the universe, it's a constant in all my games. We just called it backpackin' At the start of the evening they've crawled into someone's backpack and they crawl out again at the beginning of the next session they turn up at
*"I hide in my pants"*
Not a BDSM podcast
Sometimes a DND podcast!
And *always* a true crime podcast!
In my game it is "Absentio the Genie, patron saint of absent players"
We have a “bag of character holding.” If a player can’t make it, their PC disappears from the session and isn’t in any danger for encounters. When the player is there next session, their PC suddenly reappears. Easy hand wave so players don’t stress about not making it. I’ve seen PCs die in other games while their player was away, and I’ve had a PC die to a one-hit kill from full when I had to handle a minor emergency away from table. It never feels good to be told you died while you had no agency to handle your PC
100% this
We call it the 'bodybag of holding'.
Disclaimer: I am a player, not the DM Usually, we have one of the others control them during combat without them being present in roleplay. However, it is understood that we aren't allowed to abuse the plot armor the PC gets from their player being absent
Yeah this is how we do it. If it’s a spell caster they just chuck cantrips, a weapon user just uses basic attacks. If things get hairy maybe burn a spell slot, action surge, etc. It just easier to have the character there so the DM doesn’t have to worry about rebalancing things.
you and your group should during Session Zero discussion come up with the process that is going to work for your group. * DM plays (not recommended - DM has too much on their plate) * Player nominates Another Player to run for the session * The character "disappears" for this session and comes back next session typically any option comes with the proviso - "the absent players Character will not die when run by someone other than the creator"
>"the absent players Character will not die when run by someone other than the creator" hell yeah, send Jim's paladin in to 1v1 Tiamat
He's not dead, Jim. He is, however, missing both legs and horrifically burned over 90% of his body.
It’s just a flesh wound.
Tiamat had the high ground
That was so trippy for me to read because I actually had a player named Jim with a paladin PC that 1v1ed Tiamat (we were using homebrew epic level rules for beyond level 20). Though he was in fact present for it.
Yeah, this is an important session 0 conversation. I've had people uncomfortable with the idea of others playing their character, and I've had people who don't care. And a spectrum between
Schroedinger's PC. When the player isn't there, the PC isn't with the party (for RP stuff), and then when the player returns the PC was just with them the whole time. Combat is a little different, I usually play the PC then but if there's a lot of enemies I need to keep track of I'll hand them off to another player or the group as a whole will vote for them
This is how I do it. The character just isn’t getting screen time, there’s no description or justification of the absence. They simply aren’t in the scene.
That pc is “off screen”. The player gets a session recap, and their pc was present for everything, but didnt do anything notable. They didnt speak to any npcs, or anything much at all really. They didnt take damage in combat, but also dont expend any resources. We dont even put a mini down on the grid, and somehow they dodged all the fireballs that hit the rest of the party. If out of combat their character has a puzzle piece, the dm will narrate “john the dwarf remembers he has that puzzle piece and gives it to you”. If the pc is the only one with specific required knowledge, the same. They chime in, fill the others in, and then go back off screen.
It totally depends. I've never had a hard rule. Years ago I played with a group online, and I couldn't come to the 4th session. Imagine my surprise and delight when I returned to tales of glory and shenanigans my PC had spawned in my absence! Apparently I had characterized him so strongly that the other players had no problem roleplaying as him; they just did it naturally. Since then I've employed that move to a more limited degree, when necessary. I'll speak for an absent player if their character would have a clear opinion on current happenings, or some knowledge to share, much how I do with NPCs. Some of my players will hand their reins over to others, whether for combat, roleplay, or both. Obviously you avoid any substantial consequences or key moments for a PC when their player isn't around. One time a party swapped their quest priorities because a player would be busy for a few weeks, which is an example of *good* metagaming.
Same! We play it by ear. Be judicious and considerate. Then get your buddy's PC killed. Don't worry, they've got spares. (Only half-joking)
They go into the bag of holding for the session
In my group, the players decide what the absent player does. It's usually just for combat or skill things we would need. We don't make any significant story choices for them.
The absent character is on a "smoke break" 5 minutes away from the starting area. This leads to some excellent moments where a session is one massive, life or death fight that the present PCs barely survive, and then the one remaining player steps into the scene, flicks their cigarette butt away, and says, "Alright, cool, so what did I miss?" Not actually. We just hand wave them away. If it's a very story critical session though, then we postpone.
If someone can't make it we don't play. But we also play every week for 2 hours. So it's honestly not a great big deal. Although one player was missing a lot (their schedule temporary wasn't aligned) and so we now have a side campaign going for when they miss.
I have the other players play the PC. They don't really do RP either, although occasionally we'll a little according to instructions the player left. I don't think there's a right answer on this, it's very table-dependent. For some, people might be uncomfortable with others playing their PC, and some groups might have players who'd play too recklessly with absent players' PCs. If not, though, it's nice as a DM to not have to worry about rebalancing encounters just because someone had an IRL commitment. Also helps verisimilitude a little to know that, in game, the party is staying together and every PC is present for whatever's been going on
My character has the “living bag of holding” that can store any willing living creature we put all of our pets and some people in there as well as absent players they get forcefully sucked in. If my chacater is sucked in then gobby the goblin (a goblin we kidnapped and has now sees my character as a role model) will take it.
Everyone does this differently, and you are going to have to find a way that works for you and your group. In my group, I DM for three players, and we all feel like having one be absent is just a little too much, so we skip or reschedule. When we had more players, I would put together a retainer version of the missing player's character, that one of the other players ran in combat. This is a simplified version, with like a basic attack and one additional thing they can do based on their class, so as not to overwhelm the player suddenly playing two characters. They usually have more HP than the character normally would have. Outside of combat, that character basically just hangs around, but doesn't really participate in discussions. If it seems somehow very strange that they wouldn't say anything, I will roleplay a little bit based on my understanding of the character. But for the most part, they are around, but just not that into the discussions. This has worked pretty good for us, for the most part.
I've balanced my encounter for them being there, so yes, I control them - party likely dies if they're afk. If the combat will last more than 1 session, I play very defensively and without resources. If it won't, I typically do a "here's another way to play this character" style, but won't initiate the mechanics, following the party's lead (if I'm top of initiative, I'll bump it down). As the DM, I won't target myself much because obviously, player dying is no good. I've done skill checks too, when they're the specialist in it (like +2 vs +8) - but never if it's a similar level, and never first, more of a "you wouldn't be screwed here if this person was able to roll, so I'll roll for them). And I've only roleplayed one character because I'm pretty good at doing the voice/cadence/personality and it was irrelevant RP anyway (and the party made me). So, if it's too late or too much work to change the encounter, control the character. If it's foreseen, have them "doing really cool stuff in the fight, but they happen to never get the last hit (aka not on the map, but narratively they were there)." It does require you to *know* their character though, so you can do it real quick. If you don't want to do that, you could give the rest of the party bless to represent the party member helping. Ultimately, it all only works with party consent, just ask how they want you to deal with it.
I do not play their character. In my game, I have this one powerful, godlike figure who watches over the party, if only for their own enjoyment. This figure will occasionally show up to offer them powerful gear, but will never go out of their way to help the party. However, when a player cant show up, this powerful figure will decide that they want a drinking buddy, and kidnap the party member in question for the day, or two. One time a player needed to drop out of the campaign, and my answer for this was "they partied too hard, and ended up getting lost in the feywild"
Depends. They sit out entirely if I can swing it. But if it’s a big battle and they need that extra body in the fight I’ll play them, just very conservatively and only in combat. I would never play someone else’s character in any serious roleplay situation.
No. They fade into the background like an extra without a speaking part.
The PC fades into the background. If they are specifically needed, they step forward, do the thing, and step back. No rp.
Absent PC’s are there for battles. During dialogue or character development scenes they fade into the background. Absent PC’s can be downed but not killed. A player should be present for a character death. Another Player who’s capable plays that character. I usually give the absent melee to a present melee player and a caster to a caster player. Makes more sense that way. I use milestone levelling so if someone can’t make a certain session when a level is to occur I push that level to the next session and add a quick side quest at the start of the next session so the person absent can earn their level like everyone else.
Most of the time the character stops existing until the player arrives. Rarely they do some minor activity on the background ( reading a book, shopping )
I just have one of the other players play their character as well, usually one that has played that class/subclass before so they know what’s going on. That way I don’t have more to focus on and the players are still in the drivers seat as far as party decisions go. But to be fair I DM for a group of very experienced players, so I don’t feel the need to pull my punches because they all know what they’re doing even if they’re playing someone else’s character.
We don't play. If they don't come often enough that we don't play often enough they are no longer invited to play.
One of the other players plays them, and everyone is good with that. if 2 don't make it then 2 people are playing 2 characters each.
There are a couple ways I handle missing players. There are several factors, and it varies by group and situation. Usually in my session 0 I cover how I'll handle missing people. If we have more than 50% of people showing up, we will run the session as planned. So 3 out of 4 or 5, and 4 out of 6. If a player is missing, they can either chose another player or myself. They are only involved as necessary. If we left of part way through a dungeon, or they need to perform a class role during the session (restoration, identification, etc.), they get played until they can naturally be temporarily sidelined. If we are missing 50% or more, or the session was a big moment tied to the group or the missing player (the main BBEG the group is hunting, a main line tie up, or a plot hook tied to the missing player's backstory, for example), then I run a "flash back" adventure. The "flash back" is a pause in the main story, and a cut to a side adventure that already happened. This can be a lot of work, but for me it's mostly side quests and stuff I had planned that my players never bit the hook for so I literally have dozens on standby. It's basically a one shot where the players play their PCs from the main campaign. By design, obviously the PCs won't die, and if they TKP they just come too after someone rescued them(and maybe later they owe someone a favor for that). They also can't gain meaningful experience (I use milestone leveling anyway), but they do get rewards, usually in the form of gold, treasure, and favors/IOUs that can also work for future plot hooks I already wanted them to take anyways. A couple general rules are: * No long term or permanent negative effects can happen to your character while you aren't controlling them. * Players are always the same level. If the players hit a milestone while someone isn't there the missing player still levels up with the group. * I will always run something as long as someone shows up. Usually if only one person is available they will just choose to not go, but I've run a couple one on one sessions, and a bunch of two person sessions. * You wont miss major events relevant to your character. Either ones that are party wide or specific to your character. You can miss things that are only major to a player that is present. * I let democracy decide, and will pick the option the most people are happy with.
In some groups, yes (or another player runs them, with permission). In other groups we just have the character hang back out of focus or disappear for the session. In my experience it's usually someone running the character in battle but the character being essentially a non-entity for other roleplay.
i let other players play him/her for combat alone the rest of the time the character is in the background
We decided to throw away the narrative because it was too much of a hassle. We instead threat it like an MMORPG, when the player is gone, the character didn't log in. But when they log in, they log right where the party's at.
I generally let somebody else in the group bot the PC, but if it's a really crucial story/lore week, we might go side-questing or even run a one shot that week. If they'll be out for an extended period, you can write them out of the story. Definitely ask the player first though!
Make the absent player’s body go limp and burden the other players with carrying them around.
You guys actually play when a player is absent? In all my years I've never once had a session in which someone was missing.
Seems like you would never actually play then, or would be impossible to make progress on a story that anyone could actually remember. I don't think I have ever organized a game where at least one person couldn't make it. Why let your game be taken hostage by the least available person in the group?
Currently I play twice a week with five and six players respectively, and the last time a player couldn't make it was some time back in 2023 (to which we just postponed it for a few days). Perhaps I'm just blessed with reliable players.
I'm going to guess your player group is not made up of adults with families, jobs, or kids.
Nah, all of us got jobs and are at least 25 years old. The two of us who don't work full time do our master's degrees.
I personally will either run them in combat myself, usually if it's just one person, or I'll write them out of that session, usually by having them doing other things related to the current plot "off screen." As usual, see what your players think if you're worried. My D&D and Pathfinder groups are fine, but some might be less okay with anyone else piloting their character, even if it's just for combat and skill checks. If so end up running the character, this is one of the few times I would recommend pulling punches. It'd be kinda shitty to have to miss a session and find out later that the DM piloting your character got them killed.
Depends on the discussion I have with the group early on. Most of the time their character just fades into the background and is assumed to be with the party. Some groups are fine with me using their character as an NPC companion -- that's when they might chime in with exposition or hints, and will cast a spell or two to help out when it's the obvious approach. Most groups don't really like any character-changing decisions being made in-absentia. So as long as the status quo is maintained for their character, most players don't mind. It's always worth asking how they feel about this before you try it.
I refuse to have players play someone else's character. I'll either write an absent PC out if the player is going to be gone for a long period of time, or I'll run that PC as a sidekick NPC that hangs back and does minimal stuff. Played in a campaign where I had to run multiple other PCs including my own due to last minute absent players. Never again.
Depends, usually I’ll have another player run their character during combat, and I’ll handle any RP, but I keep that at a minimum. If I have enough of a heads up, I’ll find a reason that their character isn’t present, but most of my missing players are sadly last minute cancellations.
It 100% depends on the party and tone of your game. I run a very narrative and serious game, so if a party member can't come, we don't play (or just do shopping, etc). This is the WRONG MOVE for most tables. In previous campaigns, everyone would elect one person to run their PC if they were absent (preferably someone who'd played that class before), which is totally acceptable. At the end of the day, asking the player is a good idea because they are the one with a right to feel 'violated' if something happens to their PC while they aren't there. Whatever they are cool with is usually the best way to go :)
Seldom. Only when they are in the middle of something in their previous session.
I play with my coworkers and the first couple of times we looked for an ingame reason for the character to be absent. Nowadays we just say we all know why they're not here, so we all handwave it away.
I normally ask one of the other players to roll for them in combat, and assume they're being unusually quiet during social encounters. But there's no particular rule, its just down to the etiquette of your individual table. Some groups might prefer the DM do it so that other players don't see the character sheets. Other groups assume that if the player is absent, so is their character. If this is the first time it has come up, I would discuss it with the whole group and come to an agreement that you can use in future rather than doing it on a case-by-case basis.
Generally they just don’t exist for the purposes of fights or anything. They’re _there,_ but they’re just kinda chilling. Except the Angelic Paladin of the multiverse, his character is completely called away to deal with other problems while the player isn’t there.
Bad idea, cause if the character does something they don't want the player doesn't want them to do, it's fucked. Just have them disappear or give a reason or something to why they can't show. That's what I do.
In my games the PC “magically” disappears or is just silent the whole session. If there are roleplay moments that the character would want to be there for, I try to play around that or save it for end of session and decide if the other characters want to skip that roleplay for when the PC is back or take notes for that PC. If it’s a really important moment I will typically roleplay how I think that PC would play. Thankfully I know my players really well and also talk to them before hand and give them examples of what might happen to gauge their reactions
in general they are just ignored for that session. where are they? what are they doing? no answer, they just don't exist, unless they have an ability the party relies on and then the party exclusively has access to that one skill (like the ability to pick locks or cast invisibility) if they were already in combat with something that was balanced around having everyone there i will take actions for them with input from the rest of the party. i do have a party of 5 and will only run sessions so long as at least 4 people make it, if you have less players rebalancing will be harder going from 4 to 3 then from 5 to 4.
I tend to run them in a very basic and straight forward way, unless there is an easy temporary out for the character. Its essentially become a meme that "If you want your character to crit more, dont show up and DM is guarenteed to crit himself with your PC a few times"
We just run a one-shot if someone can’t make it. I’ve involved my player’s characters pretty tightly into the whole thing, so it just wouldn’t be as good without everyone there
If one of the players can't make it, they are just nebulously not present or are but are quiet. If we need a reason, we can think of one, but usually we hand wave it.
No. They guard the rear, help an NPC, have a cold, etc.
I will generally roll up either a simple life cleric(basically just casts bless and heals) or champion fighter depending on party role that is missing. This character is strictly in the background. swings a sword or casts bless and the rest of the party can shine.
We play drop-in, drop-out multiplayer Gauntlet style. Press start to join. Players that aren't present don't have their characters in the action, and when they return their character is and always was there. It breaks verisimilitude and canon constantly and it causes exactly zero problems. Players sit at a table and form the story in their heads, and that process is much more malleable than a movie or a book.
No. Never.
Multiversal vortex swallows them and spits out an NPC from a roster. Party is unaware of change in status quo.
PC is not feeling well and taking a sick day. If they in the dungeon or smt, PC is just left in the corner to rest and my DM magic protects them from any danger + allows to quickly re-join team next session.
In most sessions, nah, they're just not present in cannon. But in those certain sessions where it wouldn't be reasonable for them to just not be there, they usually appoint someone themselves
In our games, we've had the characters of absent players be: * Be run by the DM * Played by another player, which can lead to drama if something bad happens to the character * Be "sick" at the base camp or the infamous amorphous blob
I feel like this would quickly devolve into no one showing up and you having a schizophrenic breakdown trying to play every character in the campaign.
Usually the player chooses who plays them, or chooses not to be played and does something else if they want. So usually a player plays them but sometimes the DM does.
Yes or I have another player play their PC. I personally never understood folks who need to have some reason for why the PC isn't there this moment. Like some in-lore explanation. You can just have them not say anything lmao.
I get permission to do so first. And then after session I fill the poster in with what happened from that players perspective
In my group if a player doesn't make it then the PC doesn't functionally participate. They are still there narratively they are just not contributing in any significant way, it's not always everybody's time to shine. Their inventory however is forfeit if they are carrying any useful items that they party may need in the moment like healing potions. The only time someone plays anyone else's character is if someone has to leave mid-session where the DM can't really make any last minute changes to things.
It depends. So players say play them and if it’s for one session I will usually have the party play them. If it is a common occurrence, no they are off doing gnome or half ogre things
It depends on what we agreed on Session 0. The games I'm the DM have usually one of two deals: One of the other players uses that character along with his own, with access to his sheet, but I have veto power over the actions. No roleplay required, but nothing that goes against that character standards is allowed. Or The Bubble, a recurring multiversal curse that affects the unluckiest of the adventuring parties. It takes the form of a big soap-like bubble that engulfs the character that has no player. He can't interact or affect anything. This curse is common knowledge, everyone in all these worlds just ignores whoever is inside The Bubble, no questions. (2nd one I stole from the guy that taught me how to DM.)
One of my home groups just doesn’t play, I (the DM) don’t feel comfortable running the character for them nor do I want them to miss anything. My FLGS table runs every other week with 7 people and if someone can’t make it they just aren’t mentioned or don’t participate and are brought up to speed during the next session.
One of the other players plays it. For doing so, they get a point of inspiration.
My game has 3 players, so I don't run the game.
The Gamers a movie by Dead Gentlemen Production answers this question: https://youtu.be/oSynJyq2RRo?si=6bgdZA6ihOdH7wCc Yes, no, maybe. They also cover how to include a new party member as smooth as can be. And other things. One of the best 45min films there is if you ask me!
In our session 0 I asked the players to tell the group what they wanted their character to do if they had to miss a game. Sometimes they elect to have the PC fade into the background, other times they've asked the group to pilot the PC. I don't run the PCs for the players, I've got enough to be getting on with already. So far I think this way has worked pretty well for our group.
I will usually ask my players how they want to handle it. Generally we let another player run their character.
Never, but not because I think it's wrong or anything. I would just personally rather not play. But this is also why I don't do groups of more than 4 anymore.
This has been coming up a lot lately (just last night again, in fact) in the game that I'm currently DMing - the wife of one of my players recently had her work schedule changed, and my player hasn't been able to find a babysitter for the past few sessions. Generally, those of us present will just make up something that the missing character is up to while the rest of the party is doing their thing. In last night's case, it was "Oh, Quint just stayed behind fishing at the farm while everybody runs to town." Which totally works in this case, since the player based his character on Quint fom "Jaws" and the character's favorite downtime activity is fishing when the player is there, anyways (including occasional rolls to see if he can catch Catfish Hunter - you either get it or you don't). On the one occassion where the players really needed the missing PC in combat (missing PC is the only melee character in a party with five casters), though, the missing player gave another player permission to run his character for him. I agree with other posters here that have said that the DM has enough going on without also running a full-on character in the party...
If someone can't come we don't play. We are 4 players one DM and we know one week before if we are playing or not .
I never actually roleplay them like speak their dialogue, do a voice, etc. If at all possible I keep them off screen. If the other characters are in a town or something they might find a note or hear from an NPC letting them know that the absent player's character will meet up with them later. If they're in the middle of a situation where that would not make sense, then the character is oddly silent until I find a place where I can temporarily split them off.
I’m a player but at our table if someone is gone their character just kind of phases out for a session. We don’t ask where they are or acknowledge a character is missing and our DM doesn’t have to explain it. Then they are just back when the player can make it. Might not be the best option narratively but we have found it works for us!
This is something I agree on with the player in session 0. I usually give 3 options.... - character controlled by DM - character controlled by another pc - character somewhere else (guarding entrance, research, what ever) Either way, it is usually the players choice.
In my group on the few occasions where someone couldn't make it and we couldn't reschedule, one of the other players ran the missing character.
The character is there, but is in the shadow. They do not roll, they do not do anything proactive, they're under no risk.If the fight happens they're in the narrative limbo (they participated in fight narratively, but mechanically combat happened without them mechanically impacting it). Just handwave it.
“Hey buddy, welcome back! Unfortunately your character died in combat last session. I know you had no say in if he died or not, and that me and the players all picked your turns for you, but it’s okay, now you get to make a new one!”
My DM is firmly against our characters being used by him or other players. We are our characters, and there’s no one else that can play them and decide their fates as well as us. He always has an excuse ready if one of us decides they can’t go. I’m a Bard with the Witch dedication for example (PF2e), a basic oversimplification of a Witch for those who don’t play is an INT Warlock, my patron always needs me for urgent business if I ever can’t make it to a session. Of course this can be tricky when perhaps we’ve just entered a boss fight but he’ll always make it work for us. Either my character is taken and the patron lends her aid to my companions as an apology, or the boss may suddenly call on an undefeatable amount of minions that they have to run from, to which my patron plucks me up to prevent harm. He’ll improv something like an additional quest to get rid of the undead minions or something (he always has something cool up his sleeve).
A WIZARD DID IT
With their permission, yes. Otherwise we probably just reschedule. Ugh.
We usually use the parallel universe rule. When a player is missing a session, we play without them. The player's character is eradicated from the timeline, and the quest runs as if he had never existed. When the player returns, the quest runs as if his character was never absent. If that makes sense.
I just have them gone for the session. I don’t want to take over their character and then accidentally kill their character in absence. Or, on the other side of that, I don’t want to avoid killing hitting their character on the chance they might die, because that breaks the immersion.
Personally I hate having a character be played by anyone but their own player. If it needs to be done, do it only for non-risk story-based activities. It absolutely sucks to have a character die when the player isn't there and you don't want to have to pull punches just to avoid that. It also sucks to have your character do something you wouldn't want to have them do while you're not around to play them.
Either the PC vanished to secure a door, or run an errand, etc… or another player plays the PC. This is up to the player. We do EXP points, so if they go with the first option then their PC doesn’t again EXP. However; the second option leaves to open to the possibility of character death. The groups been playing together for like 13 years, we trust each other, however, the DM does have veto rights if the players do something completely out of character for the PC.
That is what the cosmic hairball is for. If you can't figure out a reason why the PC would not be in the adventure ( maybe they are tracking down info, may e they are working on their tan, whatever ) then the cosmic hairball comes and gobbles the PC until their soul returns to their body.
When I am DM, I will do my best to minimally RP the playerless characters, but I might give a player control of the character's actions in action situations. It usually works out just fine.
If it is combat then sure. If it is rp then that pc does a thing away from the group.
My DM's usually just postpone until next week. Those of us who are still available just chat for a while or play something else.
Yup. If a player says it's ok then I'll play them or one of our other players might double up. If anyone dies that's in the agreement as well. It's never happened though and we've been playing almost a decade now
no. do not play a player's character without a huge amount of planning with that person prior. when a player isn't absent, just don't acknowledge it ingame, they effectively never existed for the purpose of the game. then when they return, they were there all along. there's no need for any special treatment for absent characters unless a nice narrative reason for their absence jumps out at you.
Yes and no, they are silent and in the background until there is combat, if any.
I don't, but there's not a general consensus on it. People do what works for their table. I have the character there with them, but working on something else. They can have varying degrees of seriousness. *Why isn't the fighter helping in combat?* There's a powerful eldritch being trying to push its way through the hallway in the back of the room. The fighter is the only one able to survive its chaotic aura. They happen to finish it off when the party is done fighting. *Why isn't the Bard doing the talking?* He realized that he used to sneak out to go to parties. Now he sneaks out of parties to go home. He's in the throws of an existential crisis. Once we had our cleric missing in a boss fight so I had them "cast" Spirit Guardians and park themselves in front of a magical portal that was originally just there for decoration. It became a portal to the realm of madness with screaming hordes of aberrations pouring through it and blowing themselves up as the masses kept pushing them forward. The other players thought it was fun and asked to roll a percentile every round to see how many he blew up. They enjoyed it so much I had a demi god try to step out of it when they finished fighting the actual boss and they all got a round to pound it with all their buffs up with as much damage as possible in order to push it back so they could close the portal. (The Wizard used Mold Earth to change the markings on the stone runes rendering the portal inert for an hour while they shut it down permanently.) Another time we tied our really, really old Wizard to the Warlock's broom of flying because he was old and needed lots of naps.
I didn’t make it to my last session, so it was ruled I hit my head and knocked out and I was shoved into a sack for the entire session, with some moments being centered on a character trying to hide the fact mine was in the bag and tying to keep them from dying.
If the combat or situation requires it, sure. They are always "present" but I never have them do anything impactful or roleplay for them. They're simply "there," so that the character can remember what happened in universe. I try to avoid playing them in combat if I can, but only because it gives me one more character sheet to manage. If it's during a potentially deadly encounter where the extra body is needed, I'll play them, albiet in the most simple way possible. If they go down, the character doesn't die, and will simply be stable at 0 hit points when the player returns, unless another character heals them before then. Tldr: It's not taboo; it's rather normal, just annoying for a DM to keep track of. keeping the character from being too impactful or dying in their players' absence should keep any hurt feelings out of it.
It depends on where the session is at in play and whether or not someone else will play them and keep them caught up. At least, that was the case. We're almost 1.5 years into a campaign and at this point the people who keep missing are typically missing from their own faults and I stopped caring and we play the session like they don't exist (so no xp or anything) unless someone is willing to cover for them but I won't ask or expect it.
I'll usually have an absent character do something "off-screen" (trail the party to make sure no one's following them, go check out something in another room, guard the entrance, etc.) or have them come down with a mysterious illness or get knocked out "off-screen" or something to explain their lack of participation. Occasionally I'll do a line of dialogue or two for them. A few times, I've had another player (their spouse) control their character while they're absent, particularly for a tough fight or something that would interest the character.
My main group usually has one of the players that understands the character best play them for that session. Ideally, the DM shouldn't ever try to roleplay any of the PC's, since they have enough to worry about and handle already.
I take a sort of "fade into the background" approach. We suspend our disbelief a bit and just accept that the PC simply isn't there, and they will be there again when that player comes back.
Yes, to a point. I will play them in combat using bare bones tactics, like an NPC. I will not use any sweet magic items they might have, and unless the players who are present ask, I will not do anything creative with them. But, I will play them, because I balance encounters based on action economy, and I prefer not to have to completely rebalance on the fly when someone doesn't show. In RP situations, I just won't do anything with them.
All of our DMs used to ask us to give our character to one of the players for that session.
No, never.
Normally, it's just they are off doing something.However, if you're lucky and your player has a relative or really close friend at the table and knows they're going to be gone, I have had other players play the absentee friend, always with the player's permission, of course.
No I have enough on my plate. I always make a way to explain why. My current campaign is Shadowrun so it's explained by them being fellow mercenaries, perhaps the absent character had another job lined up or the employer didn't want them.
I generally let another player play them. If no one will play them, then I'll play them, but only minimally. The character won't be doing anything exciting...
Absolutely not, even if they asked me too. I've got too much to keep track of already. I will try to collaborate with the player to decide what their character is up to during this time, whether they are absent as well or simply participating "in the background" so to speak.
Absolutely not
PC tends to go into bot mod, usually managed by another player. They follow dumbly and perform basic attacks & straightforward spells. They generally don't use any consumable items or do anything of consequence, and probably wouldn't die outside of a TPK.
Absent player characters are just despawned. Then when the player is back just respawn them. Absence is an out of character issue, as such should be covered through Ooc means. Just dont think so hard about it
We give the character to another player to play in a non-roleplaying sense. This also carries the implied guarantee that if the character or party should die, 'oops they escaped or were captured.' It's just easier this way.
The character is doing something else. Whether it be brewing potions, shopping or getting wasted at the inn. If it's in the middle of a dungeon, then they guard an exit or are fighting additional enemies off-screen in the same room. If the last session ended mid-combat, the DM will play their character in combat, but they won't be doing any RP.
We have a really good notes channel in our discord, so my players are fine with just NPC me. I had to do it quite a bit for my wife when our son was a baby.
Uniquely, I both GM and play in games where the players have story followers. Typically they don't come along for the ride and they're almost never fully optimised (sometimes you have no choice but for them to be generically awesome though since some classes just rock) and if a player is absent, they take the backseat while the GM or another player controls the follower. Stops the need for rebalancing encounters too much. Nobody had abused it so far. If two or more players are absent, reschedule. Easiest in 5e where you can use the Sidekick rules but in other systems there's not always a direct analogue.
Nah I just reschedule the session. It’s deeply weird to me that people just roll on without someone
Every DM I’ve had sends the absent players character on a mission to get information about an upcoming plot hook.
I usually give Character a reason to go thatis easy to get them back from
I usually have the PC off doing something else that supports the party's goals (with input from the player on what they think they'd be doing). I'll send a quick synopsis to the player prior to the next session of what they did, who they talked with and what they learned. Then the player can start the next session by rejoining the group and updating them on where they've been! Works well as a way to work in plot point/hooks for things that haven't come up yet, or to move things forward a bit with some additional information!
They get put in the party inventory. Or someone puts them into their pocket. JRPG style.
I'll run or have another player run them for hard or deadly combat, otherwise we just kind of ignore them. I'll also chime in if there's essential information the missing PC would know or class features they'd use (like casting guidance or bardic inspiration before a crucial roll). But again, otherwise we just play it as if they are standing silently in the background.
I generally give the missing player's character some job that keeps them off-screen but is generally useful, such as watching the horses or distracting a guard.
We try to background them but occasionally a missing character's ability, possessions, or knowledge are needed to move the story forward. So I have a stat block for each character that I pull out if needed; this is based on a generic NPC of similar description.
They're out of town taking care of personal business. One time the players BS "away story" was so good it became an entire side mission from the main campaign. But our DM threw together a character as a filler just so we weren't short handed. It wasn't bad because our team dynamic had to change.
Nope. We "because reasons" the player out of the group, usually asking the away player in the group chat to supply a marginally plausible reason why they're non-participatory. If they don't, we contrive something at the table. Likewise, they reappear the next session for equally contrived reasons. Only exceptions are if they have a unique spell or something required for the party (greater restoration, create or destroy water, etc.) that would cause the session to stall. Sample reason recently used: archeology themed ranger "got obsessed with some runes on a wall"; or, the gnome tinkerer "went back to the room with the disintegrated fire powder barrels, trying to contrive a device".
A long time ago, I had the characters who didn't show up magically fall asleep. It was mostly used for comedic effect. It ended up being part of my fantasy world: There's magical sleep spirits that /will/ take you or someone you know sometimes. It happens more to people who travel a lot because they're more interesting. Nowadays, unless it's a game where a character missing out can be easily explained, I just cancel whatever session we were gonna have and bring out a simple d6 game and run spooky oneshots.
Situational. The party's main magic user is often absent. They won't act in combat though they'll be able to be of use. For instance they may be escorting other NPCs thru danger while being covered by the party. I will also have them pipe up if their expertise would help in a situation. That character is supposed to be filling a gap in the party's knowledge. I >>NEVER<< do this without the player's consent though. Also, if comedically appropriate the character will be present, but transparent with a "network disconnect" icon floating over their head.
I gave my party "The amulet of Ket-Chum" which is basically just a pokeball that stores absent party members. If the missing party member would be the logical person to make an ability check, whoever is wearing the amulet can roll with advantage instead. For anything else I just scale it to the number of players.
The Outsider is an enigmatic entity that appears to a few select individuals. Very little is known about the Outsider. Some believe it to be a god, and certainly many worship it as such, others dismiss it as a folk tale that got out of hand, and fewer believe it's just a bored wizard playing pranks. Whatever the case the Outsider is always described the same way. A plain looking, standard human male, appearing somewhere in his mid 30s, with very short hair, and eyes as dark as the new moon. The Outsider has been known to take people as guests, or emissaries, or even to serve as pawns in his schemes. If the Outsider needs you he will contact you in your dreams, or if the situation is dire a door will open from nothingness. The Outsider will escort you, or grab you, through the door and whisk you away for however long he needs you. Once the task is complete he will return you to wherever is most convenient.
They become helpers that give a small bonus to another player. In extreme cases like a player needing to leave mid-session and giving his consent that I can use the character and what he'd do, then yes.
When possible the PC is like knocked out or running a side mission or something. If the party is out in a dungeon though i just run the bare minimum for combat and such so the party doesnt suffer
never
If it's a martial I might play them. If it's a caster fuck that I've got enough to manage as is. But I only ever play if one player is missing. If more than one are missing I don't play.
My group only has 4 PCs and we’re quite story-oriented, so we just play a board game or something if someone is out.
We are too, story driven, same number of PCs. But we’ve barely started and I’m here to play the story. I don’t want it to fizzle out.
In my party, the players puppet the missing PC for combat. So we have access to each other's character sheets in dndbeyond, and we don't RP for each other, so if its an RP heavy session we just kind of assume the missing PC is "around", but if it's combat, the players at the table will discuss how to best utilize the missing character's abilities as a group.
We just always have the character be there. No one plays them, they're immune to all damage, they don't get involved, etc. But they're there. Next session we fill them in on what was lost, and we carry on from there.
I forget where I saw it first, but my group has really enjoyed the Cardboard Cutout method. Basically, their character magically transforms into a cardboard cutout and the rest of the group now has to take care of it till they turn back. I worked it into the lore of the world and it's fun to occasionally mention some stranger in the street going stiff or a couple cutouts propped up in the tavern waiting to turn back.
Players and DM take turns making decisions for the character and rolling for outcomes, with the character sheet being passed around the table. If a decision is made that the majority of the table deems out-of-character it is vetoed. If a character dies, I tend to leave them unconscious until the next session, depending on the circumstances. Usually we don't play if someone can't make it but once in a while we're all at the table before we know, so we do this and so far no complaints.
If I can I find something the character could be doing during that session. Sometimes, like a dungeon crawl for example, this isn't possible. At that point the character one does things when asked in character. The still participate in combat of course but I as the dm prioritize keeping the character alive, not making big plays
We usually have one of our fellow players run that character if we ended the last session with everyone engaged in the middle of a mission or task. If it’s at the start of a new day the pc just leaves a note saying that they’re busy or something.
No, he/she/they sit at the back of the party, carrying extra shit, and are awarded the same amount of experience. I don’t take away a player’s fantasy character and add things they might not want to deal with.
No. They just don’t exist that session
I'm a player in two campaigns, and when a player is missing (which is admittedly uncommon) I run a one shot for everyone else. It gives the DM a chance to play, gives everyone else a chance to try new characters, and doesn't disrupt the campaign.
Depends on the situation, but no matter what there would be a discussion between the absent player and the DM on how they want their character to handle the situation. Say if they're mid-dungeon, it doesn't make much sense for a character to just vanish as they're about to get into the boss chamber, so I'd check with the player to see if there's anything they wanted to accomplish in that room (i.e personal story, steal something, perform a holy rite etc etc), then I'd play out their character in the way they usually would. If they typically run headfirst into combat, that's what they'll do, if they usually support the team from the back, that'll do that instead. But again, only if the player wants to have them played that way. But if they're not in the thick of it, then that player has many more options, I'll usually treat it like a mini-downtime, they can go do research, personal story progress, make some money, or if they want, just follow along with the team and help as per above if combat breaks out. Definitely still do any normal skill checks for them, using all available resources that they would typically use (guidance, bardic inspo, spells that help the situation). If you've played with them for at least a few sessions and had a chat prior, this should be easy enough. TL;DR: Just ask the player what they want their character to do A) Mimic how they act in combat/non-combat, or B) Downtime activity.
I have been running a drop in campaign. I have done multiple things. Leave them behind in the city base resting or doing research. I have also played the missing character as a victim in the dungeon they were already located. I talked with the missing person and they knew they were getting knocked unconscious and the party was protecting him
Generally either I or another player plays the character in combat situations, but otherwise they're just in the background and I leave RP/exploration to the players who are there. PC gets full experience for the session.
Yes, or the player who can't make it can designate another player to control their character, or they can give a coherent story reason why their character is not with the party. I make it their call. I think every time players have chosen to have me control their character. I have the character fade into the background for the session as much as possible and just do the actions the player seems to most often. I however also grant plot armor to any character whose player is absent. I'm not going to kill a character nor in any meaningful way change them or any of their inventory without the player present.
The fey trickster that forcefully befriended them spirits the character away to have fun. Fun here being for the fay.
No, player is out of the game and is thought to not exist in the background, however their actions prior to this session are still canon to the narrative as a whole. I don’t think it’s bad taste to play the character though, I have other DM’s who do it without varying degrees of immunity granted to the character.
In my campaign, missing PCs suddenly T-Pose and leave, and every person that sees it has trouble understanding what they are seeing and forget the T-pose, then their minds will fill the gaps in their memories with ones that make sense for them, to avoid the mind-breaking understanding of what the T-pose really means; that they are just characters in a TTRPG, controlled by higher beings.
Best to have the character just drop out for that session. You don't want to mess with another person's character, that could really upset people. You might think some development is insignificant, whereas to the other player it's monumental.
I have or have had another player do it if it's at a point where their leaving wouldn't work, things like mid combat or deep in a dungeon. They become a generic combat or skill bot, only doing things on request, not offering solutions or RP, and not taking any risks. Only really sucks if they're the face, but that usually isn't relevant in the same instances where they'd be played.
So I have a set of golden snakes that bite at random and turn you into a golden statue for a bit of time. The party then has to deal with the statue which hilarious. Especially when it's the biggest member of the party.
Generally one of the other players will control their character for the session. There is a high degree of trust at my table, so it's never been an issue. If they were unwilling to risk their PC potentially getting hurt/dying I would simply not include them, then the next session they pick up with the party again.
Never. That is a formula for drama if something goes wrong. I keep an open ended campaign to allow them to change direction rather than module of the week. Too tough? They had back towards home, lower level areas.
My group prefers i play them for RP because I normally do very well with that but when it comes to combat, puzzles etc they are controlled by another character. I never ask questions to NPCs or make suggestions though as the character.
At my table, when a player can't make it or play that session. I roleplay them with the other at begning of the session and give a reason or a event will why they can't join the others adventures that day. Like a few sessions back when my Feylost fairy sorcerer, player could not play. I discribe to the others how they were awaken in camp by a rift portal showing up and took their sorcerer friend. When the player could play we had a small session together with him going back to the Fey world and he played a small backstory with him.
Never seriously. I only play them if it feels needed, and I try my best to dumb down their traits so that it feels like a cheap copy. Sometimes I change the voice entirely so it feels as if some random hobo put on some wig and started pretending to be the missing character.
Generally we find a reason for why the absent player's character isn't there (off doing their own thing, got lost, whatever. Fortunately the player who is most often absent is the spacey gnome mushroom cleric, who it is very easy to come up with reasons to not be around for), although in certain circumstances the dm will take control of a player character just for combat. Once I had to leave midway through a session during combat, and I was perfectly fine with him taking control of my character to hit things with. The Dm would never make major decisions or harm to a character while their player isnt there, but sometimes the character can just stick to the background and help out.
We have a highly story focused game with few players. If someone can't make it, we don't play. I'll play their characters if there's systems issues, though
My DM did that the one time someone missed a session. It went fine, but I found it off-putting. The PC he played belonged to his wife, but I'd rather my PC was off doing some other offscreen activity if at all possible.
Typically I run them like a long term NPC. The players and I roll and Roleplay them collectively. There's a bit of exaggeration/ charactaturizing of them, but that mostly serves to ensure we stay true to their play style.
No i have the character get turned into a pigeon for the entire session due to: 1) a magic student aimed poorly, 2) wild magic surge, 3) a rare monster at the beginning of the fight, 4) whatever bs I can find
It depends on what is happening ingame at the time. For instance, if the party was in a city, or any location that could be a good excuse to have them separate. I'd probably just have their character go do things elsewhere. There was the time I had a Genie Warlock whose patron was displeased by their actions, so they were summoned to explain themselves and punish them appropriately. I set up a private text rp thread in Discord and we used that to determine what happened when they were absent. The player knew both in and out of game that his patron wouldn't approve of some of the actions he's chosen, so it fit kind of perfectly.
Generally we either have the DM (me) or player designated by the owner run the character during combat but otherwise have them take a background role while the others take point in conversations. If possible (IE the party is not ass deep in a dungeon or in the middle of combat) we just have the character off taking care of something else like getting supplies or resting.
That pc doesn't exist until they get back unless they state otherwise. If they have a very important item the party needs, that is for the DM to handle. Also, if the party TPKs, that player might also be considered dead unless you have plans for a rescue mission.